>   I don't understand how it is more inaccurate than using one normal
scaled
> very small + antialiasing, which also shoots reflected rays in random
> directions.

Perhaps I should add, that I was thinking of averaging textures with their
normals scaled very big. Otherwise there is no difference.

When random normals are scaled very big, they reveal a 'banding' effect that
I would say is more inaccurate than 'noise' because it catches the eye and
is perceived as "this looks wrong" rather than "this image has a little
noise".

Regards,
Hugo

Post a reply to this message